Twins or not?

[Essex export]

Am I laboring under a misconception? I have been assuming that if I find two births (in the BMD index) registered together and with the same reference that they are twins.
If they really are twins, how can two births registered in the same place but 5 quarters apart have the same reference?
Am I missing something?

The answer is out there - I hope!

Regards
Andy

[suttontrust]

I'm not clear what you mean.  The BMD index goes by quarter, so if you find two births with the same surname with the same reference in the same quarter, it just means that they were registered in the same quarter.  If the two births are registered 5 quarters apart, but in the same place, the district and volume number would be the same.  If they have the same page number, that would be a coincidence.
If you are looking for twins, they would almost certainly be registered at the same time, and so would have the same reference.

[Essex export]

Hi Suttontrust

I have  1894 2nd quarter   Charles   Ketch  Holbeck  9b 334
                                        Dan     Ketch  Holbeck  9b 325

             1895 3rd quarter Jane      Ketch  Holbeck  9b 325     

I have found known twins before which as you say will be entered at the same time and have the same ref but why do births so far apart as the above have the same reference? Dan is my grandfather and you can see that within the same quarter numbers have moved on between Charles and Dan's births.

Regards
Andy

[sillgen]

The final number is the page reference.  If there were not many births they would still be on the same page although the quarter had changed.  Alternatively they might have had so many the number came round again!    I am sure they are not twins.  Cousins maybe?  Have you looked them all up in 1891 and 1901?   That might solve your problem, so might looking at the deaths.
Andrea

[suttontrust]

If Charles and Dan are twins, that's fine.  Jane was born over a year later, and because she was born in the same place the district and volume number are the same.  It's the page number that's a coincidence.  If you've got this info from FreeBMD it would be worth checking the image to make sure the page numbers are right.

[sillgen]

I can't see that Charles and Dan can be twins if the numbers are 334 and 325.  There is no way they can be consecutive unless I am missing something!  Never was very good at maths!
Andrea

[MaryA]

Have you thought of a typing error of the middle number?
Charles entry in the local register could be at the bottom of Page 334 (or 324)
Dan's entry could be at the top of Page 335 (or 325)

Mary

[sillgen]

I have looked at the original GRO page and the numbers are correct as on there.  Could have been an error between the local office and the GRO I suppose.
There is a death for a Charles later that year.   If it is him he dod not last long, poor child.
Andrea

[trish251]

Hi Andy

1901 - No sign of Charles or Jane

George Ketch 31 Warmington  Warwickshire Head   Coal miner
Susannah Ketch  30 Churwell Yorkshire     Wife
Dan Ketch 6 Churwell Yorkshire Son     
William Ketch 4 Morley Yorkshire Son 
Albert Ketch 2 Churwell Yorkshire Son 
74 Kassell St Castleford  Yorkshire  RG13/4305  111/16

Jane from FreeBDM
Birth Sep 1895 Jane Ketch Holbeck  9b 325
Death Dec 1895 Jane Ketch Holbeck 9b 229 age 0

On FreeBDM there are 236 Births at Holbeck in Sep 1895. Page numbers at random are 323  325 335 338  max 10 per page
1894 Jun quarter there are 231
similar page numbers  321  322  331  340  - there appear to be up to 10 births per page  and FreeBDM is supposed to be complete for this period so about 23 pages would be needed
Same series seem to be reused for Jan quarter 1894

If you ever work out this numbering system - do let me know

And I think your Charles and Dan are probably twins. Only a certificate or baptism is going to have the answer I would think.

Trish